Gov. Jerry Brown arrived in Paris Saturday to attend the international climate summit. His schedule includes 20 meetings over five days with world leaders. He plans to highlight California”s laws on renewable energy and pollution reduction, along with encouraging other governments to copy California. He also plans to sign agreements, give speeches and promote California businesses.

For the 77-year-old Democratic governor, slowing climate change has become a centerpiece issue during his final term in office. In a wide-ranging interview with San Jose Mercury News environment writer Paul Rogers this week, Brown discussed why California is being as aggressive as it is on climate, his views of Republicans who are skeptical of the science of climate change, the role of nuclear power and offshore wind energy in California”s future, and why he won”t ban fracking.

Brown also discussed a recent controversy in which he was criticized for asking a state agency — the Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources — to provide information about whether there is oil under a 2,700-acre ranch in Colusa County that his family has owned for more than a century. The agency provided maps and other information that said prospects were “very low” for oil being located there.

The following is the full interview:

SJMN: “Why are you going to the Paris summit and why have you put so much emphasis on the issue of climate change as governor?

Brown: “Climate change is a real threat to the world and to the future. Currently it”s exacerbating forest fires and the unavailability of the snowmelt that we traditionally depend on. Climate change is important. California is a leader, taking bold steps. But we don”t want to just be the exception; we want to be the norm. We want others to join with us, and they are. Almost 60 states and provinces have joined in the Under 2 MOU (an agreement to reduce greenhouse gases 80 percent by 2050). That is going to be a mechanism by which the signatories join together to advance climate initiatives and the goals that are outlined, and also to constitute ourselves as a catalyst to stir the nation states to much greater action as will be required after the COP-21 (Paris conference) concludes in two weeks. There”s much to be done. There”s a role for states and provinces, and California is certainly doing its part to advance our common objectives.”

SJMN: “In recent months and years, you”ve met with the president of China and the pope and other world leaders to discuss climate. I”m curious what you might say to folks who would say ”Jerry Brown is governor. He”s not the head of state. Why is he acting like one on this issue?”

Brown: “Climate change is not limited to the borders of California. If we do everything right, we will absolutely fail. We won”t even make a dent. But if we can enlist others who might otherwise be somewhat reluctant, we really do advance the cause of making our environment more sustainable in terms of reducing our carbon footprint. California is a place that”s almost a site of pilgrimage. Presidents bring huge delegations. They come to Silicon Valley. They stop in San Francisco. They want to almost partake of the innovative atmosphere of the state, and in that context, our environmental policies are also pace-setting. I don”t want our capacity to inspire others to not be exercised. And that”s what I”m doing.

Brown: “It”s absolute nonsense. They are either intellectually lazy and have done no study at all, or they”re cynical and just join in the fossil-fuel, Koch Brothers-manipulation of public opinion. In any event, the action of the Republicans in fighting President Obama, the states that are contesting his clean air efforts, the letters that people are writing to other heads of state to undermine the president. It”s shameful, it”s divisive and it is weakening America”s position in the world, and it ought to stop.”

SJMN: “Is that part of the reason why you”ve stepped up, to offer an alternative to the world on what Americans think?”

Brown: “I certainly want to bolster the president. But my primary goal is to realize California”s potential in innovation and dealing with climate change. I do think California is a good example because our economy is doing better than the nation, better than Texas, and we have the most aggressive climate change policies in place. When the Republican presidential candidates say ”I”m not going to destroy the economy by doing something about climate change, they”re flat wrong. And they make a spectacle of themselves for thoughtful, informed people. I don”t underestimate the power and the danger of the Republican majority in Congress and their candidates for president. I think there”s a real risk here, that instead of providing consistent leadership, America will bog down in bickering, and I”m going to do my part to win over independent-minded people to support a reasonable climate policy.”

SJMN: “Here at home, there are some who aren”t ideologues who have expressed concerns that lower-income folks, in the Central Valley and other parts of the state, who can”t afford electric cars or higher energy costs, may suffer as California moves ahead with its climate plans. What would you say to them?”

Brown: “I”d say that we”re doing things like providing weatherization and efficiency upgrades for people”s homes. We are exploring ways of making vehicles available, and we are also promoting mass transit and cleaner mass transit. Climate disruption will disproportionately affect people based on income. So those who have the least money will experience the greatest difficulties. And that”s not right. We”re not going to give up on climate change because of the issues of inequality. That”s true on housing. It”s true on medical care. It”s true with education. And it”s true with climate change. It”s true with longevity. People with very low incomes live much shorter lives than people with higher incomes. We have many policies to deal with all that. But we can”t certainly throw out the baby with the bath water. We”ve got to keep on course, reducing our carbon footprint.”

SJMN: “A lot of environmentalists have praised your trip going to Paris and say that it really represents all they had hoped for when they endorsed you when you were running. There is still this criticism — and I know you”ve heard it — about fracking. You”ve put in place tougher rules for fracking, but some of them say: ”Why can”t you just ban it?”””

Brown: “Some are saying ban oil drilling. We already import 70 percent of the oil that goes into our vehicles. And what do they want to do? Import 75 percent? And bring it in by train from North Dakota where they don”t even have controls on methane and the environmental standards are much lower? And you put it on a train, which is subject to spills. That doesn”t make any sense. Or we could go get it from Venezuela, or Iraq or Saudi Arabia, and put it on a polluting ship that uses bunker oil and has more pollution. What we have to do is have a thorough, integrated plan to reduce fossil fuel consumption. That”s what we”re doing.

And in a state which drives 332 billion miles a year, we”re not going to do it overnight. We”ve got to build support, we”ve got to take it step by step, and yes, at the end of the day, oil and gas and coal resources have to be left in the ground. But we don”t just say stop. Some of the people don”t stop with fracking. They say you shouldn”t have oil drilling. There”s a lot of things we shouldn”t have and that we have to overcome. And we will. California has the most aggressive plans. We could stop fracking tomorrow, but we”d be much worse off. I”m doing this in the sequence that I think can be sustained. You just saw, there were 18 Democrats — 14 Democrats — that voted to reduce the oil mandate, and there was nobody, I didn”t see very many activists fighting the oil companies.

I”ve signed an executive order. I want to reduce oil 50 percent. That”s real. Now how fracking fits into that, you have to look at it. But people have jumped on this because fracking has a certain sound to it. It is onomatopoeiatic. The job is complicated. It involves tree planting. It involves cement. It involves where you live. It involves public transportation and private vehicles, and research. It”s a very wide-ranging, sophisticated effort that is required. We have to not do it for a year or five years. We have to do it for 50 years. And so we have to put the building blocks in place, and we have to keep on going. So if somebody says “I think you ought to do it this way,” well, present it to the Legislature if you”ve got an idea. But I”m conscientiously putting together the most far-reaching carbon reduction plan that I believe is sustainable over the long term.”

SJMN: “What”s your take these days on nuclear power in California”s future as it relates to climate? Diablo Canyon has its licenses expiring in 2024 and 2025. Do you have any thoughts about whether it should stay open beyond the expiration of those licenses?”

Brown: “No. I”m not ready to opine on that. There are people who believe, and there are scientists working on it, in a more standardized nuclear reactor that won”t generate nuclear materials that can be used in bomb-making. That would be good. And nuclear that would somehow avoid the waste problems. Because there are issues with nuclear power. So that”s another complex subject that I think people should be open-minded on as we go forward.”

SJMN: “What about offshore wind? I was just in Morro Bay writing a story about a company proposing to build a floating offshore wind farm 15 miles off the shore: 100 turbines. I wonder if you have any thoughts on that? They are using it in Europe a lot.”

Brown: “I didn”t know that it is cost effective. We are going to have to do some of that. It sounds certainly intriguing. Without knowing more, I certainly think it ought to be explored. I haven”t heard about it. I haven”t heard you can actually finance it.”

SJMN: “There was this stuff in the news recently about DOGGR (the state Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources) and the maps that you asked for. I wonder if you could clear that up.”

Brown: “That data was coerced from my forebears. They had to file it with DOGGR. Then there are bureaucrats who say, ”that”s not your information. We hold it. You can”t have it.” Public records belong to the people of California, and public officials are people. And that material, it”s like a library. That”s there for the benefit of future generations. It ought to be looked at, it ought to be used. What I asked for, anybody else can ask for and will get. And contrary to what has been written, the same exact information is available. It is not a secret to be held in the hands of same employee or bureaucrat. It is there to be used, to be seen.”

SJMN: “Did you plan to drill for oil on that property?”

Brown: “No. We”ve already drilled for oil in 1900, 1923, and never found any. You want to get deeds. I”ve got original deeds to the property. Some of them go back to 1865 when Abraham Lincoln was president. Is that secret? No, that”s public record. If you dig a trench, you call up the municipal utility and say ”Where are the power lines” and they give you a map. It”s public record belonging to the public and anything to the contrary does a disservice for what we”re trying to do for the people.

SJMN: “That”s helpful. But just to clarify, you didn”t have any plans to look for oil? Why did you need the maps then?”

Brown: “Because, I need the maps. I have a woman, and we”re doing the geology, we”re doing the fauna, the flora, the vegetation, the oak trees. We”ve got to know what”s out there. And I”m putting it all in a glass case. You can come and see it someday, including the drilling reports and the deeds from the time of Abraham Lincoln. You can see all that. And I”m very interested in recapturing the history of my forebearers. And I would encourage other people to do that. But be clear: No one went out to the property; no one did any prospecting. It was just a retrieval of public data that was taken from my great-grandfather and others and kept in the repository of the state. So certainly that should be available to you and everybody else. That whole story there was just, you can read it for yourself. Steve (Steve Bohlen, former head of DOGGR) said it took about an hour. These are Google maps. Let”s get real here.”

SJMN: “Is there anything else you”d like the public to know about Paris?

Brown: “It”s a damn serious challenge. And it”s not for a day or one technology. It”s going to take an unrelenting commitment from people from all over the world to secure the future.”